With good reason if you ask me. I mean, I was all about the WC nostalgia and easter eggs, but a good movie it was not.

__________________
Now imagine a music, dear readers, heavy with cellos at a rapid staccato. Cellos held between thighs in a dark room. The little room of Harry's chest as he walks with his teammates to the opening gate of his first Test of Cribbage. They are a rag-tag group of champions, this bunch, and with Harry, the near-perfect new god, they know they will dominate the day. Harry is a world laced with rivers of wizardly blood. He is ready.

The hubbub over the movie is the only really notable thing about it, and probably helped its ticket sales.

Yeah.

Funny enough, I almost want to consider it the "right" kind of score just because of all the overreacting it's further going to lead to. I've already seen some people say it's a masterpiece and a true achievement of female empowerment.

And on the other hand there are people who were expecting it to be another Fant4stic now having to switch their gears.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bullroarer

Don't trust critics for rotten tomatoes.

They gave a 96 percent fresh for Supergirl tv series.

Audience gave a 53 percent.

Well, there are also times when I disagree with the audience, as the case is when it comes to movies I consider shit like Man of Steel or the Transformers movies.

I still find it likely that the 70% is going to drop though, I distinctly remember Hardcore Henry having a similar score and it wasn't until the movie actually came out that it dropped like a rock. (Unfortunately I watched it before that revelation and walked out of it really disappointed.)

I just took a look at who was listed... lot of people and places I've never heard of, LOT of super liberal blog-type sites (i.e. Vox) who are going to give the movie a good grade no matter what because feminism....

I do wonder if the early screenings were stacked just a little with like-minded individuals...

Watched the James Rolfe video after hearing about the backlash. Yeah... people who think he's making up excuses to hide behind sexism are just wrong.

His complaint about the movie having the exact same title? Sounds made-up, right? No, it's a nerve of his. He's complained about that frequently in the past, I recall specific examples being "Rambo" and "Rocky Balboa" (which isn't exactly the same as "Rocky", but still bugged him). And those movies didn't ignore their original cast/stories, another nerve of his.

I think he said it right at the beginning: any review from him about this film will probably be a bad one, and there will already be bad reviews for it aplenty, and he doesn't want to see it anyway. So why should he pay them? I don't see a review from him on the Karate Kid movie with young Smith, either.

I get that. I still haven't seen Bay's first Ninja Turtles because its existence offended me... though I may cave on the sequel, because Young!Grackle is screaming something in my ear about Rocksteady, Bebop, Krang, and the technodrome on the big screen for the first time... AVGN was right about Secret of the Ooze -it cheated us out of the rhino and warthog!

A lot of the backlash was driven by sites under Sony's pay roll. Patton Oswalt was butthurt too which led more responses by his followers, and so on.
The feminism shit is but a smoke screen used for lost souls on social media while the true villains are incompetent management and the director. If you read the leaked e-mails, there's nothing more to say. Just a bunch of rich buffoons completely out of touch with reality. Hipster Spider-man breaking 2 billion. Christ.
The director said he always felt more comfortable around women as men tended to bully him. His effeminate attitude reeks in what I've read and seen about this movie. It's but a projection where female characters pay back those disgusting sexist brutes called men. A literal high school bullying revenge fantasy come to life. At least he ain't shooting up a school.
The high rating doesn't surprise me as western media is more pussified than a castrated man these days. Or maybe some (as in normal people who aren't looking for female empowerment fantasy) genuinely enjoyed the movie but I'm not gonna waste my time with it. Funny enough a common point is that Chris Hemsworth was the funniest actor in the movie. Oh the fucking irony.

It's pretty sad that people demand female centric movies, but don't care about quality as long it stars a bunch of vajayjays fighting the patriarchy. Until, maybe Captain Marvel, we're stuck with this and Wonder Woman starring Gal 'Gaza must burn' Gadot. And even for Captain Marvel I'm afraid as these days she's become a wooden dyke (heh) who looks like a trans Steve Rogers. Showing off some skin is sin. Praise Allah.

Watched the James Rolfe video after hearing about the backlash. Yeah... people who think he's making up excuses to hide behind sexism are just wrong.

His complaint about the movie having the exact same title? Sounds made-up, right? No, it's a nerve of his. He's complained about that frequently in the past, I recall specific examples being "Rambo" and "Rocky Balboa" (which isn't exactly the same as "Rocky", but still bugged him). And those movies didn't ignore their original cast/stories, another nerve of his.

I think he said it right at the beginning: any review from him about this film will probably be a bad one, and there will already be bad reviews for it aplenty, and he doesn't want to see it anyway. So why should he pay them? I don't see a review from him on the Karate Kid movie with young Smith, either.

I get that. I still haven't seen Bay's first Ninja Turtles because its existence offended me... though I may cave on the sequel, because Young!Grackle is screaming something in my ear about Rocksteady, Bebop, Krang, and the technodrome on the big screen for the first time... AVGN was right about Secret of the Ooze -it cheated us out of the rhino and warthog!

I was browsing on twitter yesterday, and saw one of the critics who gave the movie a fresh review say "AVGN is a bad guy". Like really? I guess if James acted more like his character then maybe that'd be true, but he obviously doesn't.

And that's one of the reasons why the idea of this film being critically well-received leaves a bad taste in my mouth. It could have convinced me that it actually is a good movie worth seeing, but the fact that all the terrible people backing it feel vindicated over it just turns me off from it completely.

Hmmmm...I wonder what's going on here - LOL. Obviously the initial "critics" that were handpicked for the first few screenings were done so for a reason. Let's wait and see until the other Top Critics get a chance to unbiasedly review this. Like Richard Roeper's that was just released... http://chicago.suntimes.com/entertai...rrifying-mess/